12/31/77 would take us up to RR issue #150 (October 1977). The final
issue was RR 253/254 (January 1995), which leaves us only 18 years of
Yes, many of Lenny's pasteups are crooked - I straightened as best I
could after scanning. All my page-by-page scans are as jpgs but putting
them into Adobe pdf format wouldn't be a problem. I'll have to
experiment to see if the OCR will work on the odd, small type sizes
and/or the off-center pasteups.
On 10/24/2012 7:04 AM, Sam Brylawski wrote:
> My understanding is that any work (other than a sound recording!)
> published in the U.S.before 1/1/1978 without a copyright notice is
> public domain. Period. After 1/1/1978, it's a different story. If
> Malcolm is correct about no notices, and I'm confident that he is, all
> those earlier issues are PD. Addressing a part of the initial
> question, the paid-for version of Adobe has an OCR tool built-in. How
> it would deal with the minuscule type and crooked paste-ups of RR is
> another story.
> Sam Brylawski
> On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 12:43 PM, Malcolm Rockwell <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> I have all the primary Record Research issues scanned and many of the
>> bulletins, as well as many of the the Blues Research and the Americana
>> series. I also worked up an index for the primary issues.
>> I had worked out a deal with Lenny's niece (sitting in for her mom who may
>> have passed by now) but then copyright questions arose and I shelved the
>> project. I still have all the digital files, though.
>> If anyone can establish with any finality who owned RR I would happily
>> finish the project and distribute it or release it to someone who will.
>> There is the question of a possible co-owner and/or long time collaborator
>> that could be a major copyright problem, even for releasing privately for a
>> low price.
>> BTW, there are no copyright notices anywhere in the entire magazine run but
>> I'm told that is meaningless. I really do not want to end up in court and do
>> not have the money to get lawyers involved in any of this!
>> "Publish and be damned" is fine for one's own material; not so good for
>> someone else's stuff.
>> Malcolm Rockwell
>> On 10/24/2012 3:12 AM, Mason Vander Lugt wrote:
>>> Hi ARSC,
>>> I know some of you were involved in the writing and publication of Record
>>> Research Magazine. Can any of you tell me decisively whether anyone would
>>> contest the free distribution of PDF scans of the magazine? I emailed the
>>> representative of Spivey Records (my best guess for a 'rightsholder'), but
>>> got no response. I've been collecting them when I can find them, and now
>>> have about half of the full run scanned (less the sales lists).
>>> Does anybody have any of the issues listed below that they would be
>>> to lend, give or sell to me? I intend to put them up for free download
>>> I'm finished.
>>> Finally, I think they would be much more useful if the text was
>>> Can anyone recommend a good (free?) OCR service that can accept PDF files?
>>> Thanks in advance for any help or advice,
>>> Mason Vander Lugt
>>> Still needed:
>>> 1-42, except 17, 19-20, 22-24, 27
>>> 112-220 except 189/190, 201/202
>>> (If my math seems fuzzy to you, it's because they were published in
>>> double-issues after 112)